![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I am pretty much convinced that the "Lancelot wedding assault" and "The Bridge" scenes were inspired by similar ones from a 1968 Italian movie, "L'Armata Brancaleone" by Mario Monicelli. The whole idea is also quite similar, for in this movie a poor knight is convinced by some peasants to claim a fief, whose grant documents were stolen (By them) from a noble. They then set in a "quest" to find this fief, suffering all the vicissitudes of medieval life - plague, religious fundamentalism, etc.
I disbelieve this. It's too far before their actin' time, and too close to their time to pass unnoticed...although rippin' is common among communi...eh, comic's, it's no new idea they're comin' up with. Satirization of religion and medieval times may be a usual subject among actors....and the movie would've been lashed if this was discovered. By the way, there's an difference; Here there's not just a poor knight, but a whole troupe of rich knights fighting the french and a bridge of Death. Definately more inspired by the actual tales of the knights of the round table rather than an obscure italian movie. Totally out of question, that's for sure! Stop these vile accusations, now!-- 217.199.54.130 13:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I haven't actually seen the scene in Harvest Moon: Friends of Mineral Town that is supposedly a reference to the Holy Grail, but given the description of it, that Gary cuts his hand and says "it's only a scratch", I would doubt this is actually a reference to the film. If he cuts off his hand, maybe, but unless that happens, I am skeptical. Reveilled 01:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Why is Monty Python, as in the name of the troupe, in italics throughout this article? The name of the film should be in italics, certainly, but not the group. -- Charles 03:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
reference to the movie from the legend of the green dragon on www.comfortabledumb.com server for the game
You grab your axe to attack a tree with all your strength.
As you approach a tree, you are suddenly surrounded!
You fall to the ground paralyzed as a group of towering knights start shouting at you in a menacing tone!
'NI! NI! NI!'
However, you recover soon enough to realize that in actuality, they are more annoying than dangerous.
For some odd reason, you pick up a herring and chop down one of the trees in the forest.
You harness the power of 'NI' to attack other creatures!
You've completed Phase 1 of work in the lumber yard. It only took you one turn.
it also gives you a 30 round buff in which before you attack you say Ni! Ni! Ni!
when it runs out its you now say Ecky, Ecky, Ecky, Ecky, P'tang, Zoo Boing! Goodem-zoo-owli-zhiv
--God þe mid sie, WhiteWolf 19:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anybody know what order the scenes were filmed? I do know: 1). The scenes weren't shot in chronological order; 2). On the DVD, Gilliam (part of the Gilliam/Jones DVD Commentary) states that the opening scene (the "Coconuts" scene) was shot at the end; and 3). The IMDb says that Chapman was very drunk during the beginning of the shoot, the "Bridge of Death" scene. Thank you. -- 69.253.15.246 21:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Given the fact that the Python troupe are all Oxford and Cambridge educated (outside of Terry Gilliam), one of my old English profs drew a parallel to Edmund Spencer's The Faery Queen, which depicts a character getting his limbs hacked off one by one. Is this worthy of addition in this article? And, further more, are there any other links between this film and classical literature?-- Toquinha 19:34, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
There are very many references to medieval literature. Terry Jones was a medievalist (and still is), and it's often been asserted that the references are largely his. One such reference is the 'built a castle. It sank. Built another one…' which is part of the Merlin cycle. I have added a rider where the film is described as a 'parody', and a linkt to Terry Jones. I'm not sure if it would be right to add references, for example to the Faery Queen and the Merlin parts. On the one hand, we're always being encouraged to reference. On the other hand, there are so many (and many are quite minor), that it would be illustrative rather than truly referential. Also, the article is already in danger of becoming trivia. Any thoughts? Martin Turner 22:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't the plot be above production and re-release? That's the tried and true setup. FruitMart07 23:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm more concerned about the haphazard nature of the plot summary. (Episodic, strung together only by the quest for the grail? Isn't that how most movies work? They're called "scenes".) For such a landmark film in geek history, the recap is all over the place. I'll take a whack at cleaning it up, while I'm at it I'll move it above the other two. Delius1967 04:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Some of the cultural references listed here seem to merely be coincidences, such as the Banjo-Tooie, Dynasty Warriors 4, and Elder Scrolls III: Bloodmoon references. For example, shouting "Run away!" when being attacked is a bit too general to be a reference, as is an elderly man shouting "I'm not dead yet!" when close to death. Ralff 22:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
The articles which appear in the "Characters" and "Miscellaneous" sections of the {{ Monty Python and the Holy Grail}} template seem to be prime candidates for a merge - I propose List of Monty Python and the Holy Grail characters - and that the minor misc. items be merged to this article. In fact, there's no real need for a template for this film at all, since each article on it links to each other through this one. QmunkE 14:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
My GOD! That list is larger than the article. I have moved it over to Talk:Monty_Python_and_the_Holy_Grail/reference_list so users can go in, trim it down and take what is most important. Wikipedia isn't a list of trivia. But it is not paper. So try working out what really needs to belong at the reference list and add them to the article. -- Orbit One Talk| Babel 21:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
On the file sharing networks, a copy of what has to be the Special Edition DVD of the film is circulating. However, it does not, as the wikipedia page state, miss "the "Swedish" subtitle "Mønti Pythøn ik den Hølie Gräilen" in the film's opening title screen", neither does the opening credits of Dentist on the Job appear "before the voice of the projectionist (presumably that of Terry Jones)".
It was copied (not made / re released) 2004.09.15 according to its information, meaning it can't be the "Extraordinary Deluxe" version. It does contain the two audio commentary tracks, the "get on with it"-cut out scene etc, and a separate DVD with all extra stuff (Japaneese dub, LEGO animation, The Quest for the Holy Grail Locations etc). In order words, it seems to me it has to be the Special Edition DVD, but if that is so, then there are either more than one version of the Special Edition DVD, or the wikipedia page is simply incorrect. Someone with a bit more insight could perhaps look at it? :) -- Ojan 23:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
"The title of the film, which would normally come at the start, appears after 25 minutes."
I am removing this, as it is false. The second credit at the very beginning is the title of the film (with its infamous fake subtitle that is allegedly missing from certain editions), and the animated sequence that appears 25 minutes (24 minutes, to be more precise) into the film features a slightly different title: The Quest for the Holy Grail. Funkeboy 23:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
wat happened to my add on at the end of the trivia? about the R2R credits thing? its legit, im one of those weird people who still have a dreamcast, and i just beat the game(not the first time) and there it was. i swear.
The juggreserection 03:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
never mind its there now.
The juggreserection 03:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Saturday Night Live producer Lorne Michaels first met Chevy Chase while they were both waiting in line to see Monty Python and the Holy Grail. That meeting led to Chevy being hired on to SNL, and the start of his carrer. Not sure if this bit of trivia is relevant enought to the subject though, but I thought I'd mention it here in case some more experienced Wiki editor wants to reasearch it and add it to the article.
I think that the plot section needs to be expanded and refined a bit. I know that the movie really has very little actual plot, so that may be a problem, but we have to much information outside of the plot section anyway. Mbatman72 20:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Question on authenticity of the source for these subtitles; compare here and the lines below towards the beginning of the movie (at the first castle):
These two lines, among others (check your DVDs) suggest that Henry IV: Part 2 was adapted into what can basically be called a Shakespeare-esque version of Holy Grail. Anyone? -- M ( speak/ spoken) 21:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't we have a page about the French taunter? He is a pretty popular character, and leads one of the most humorous scenes in the film.
See the Userbox. — JuWiki ( Talk <> Resources) 01:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
"In the SRPG Disgaea 2: Cursed Memories, there is an item called Charred Newt. The description says "It didn't get better.", referring to Sir Lancelot."
This isn't referring to Sir Lancelot, but a villager John Cleese was playing at the time. To reference Shakespeare, "One man in his time can play many parts..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.53.33 ( talk) 19:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
//pink floyd-Monty Python\\
Is the pink floyd song chapter 24, any relation to scene 24 in the film? pink floyd gave a lot of funds to the making of holy grail. MrOrange91 12:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
In the DVD commentary track Gilliam says the budget was 230 thousand, so I believe the 150 thousand that's currently in the article is incorrect and will be changing that. Ponijs <fatalis> it also says 230 in this FAQ: http://bau2.uibk.ac.at/sg/python/Sources/monty.python.faq.html
The "Monty Python and the Holy Grail (Book)" 1977 Eyre Meuthen includes a "Cost of Production Statement". The bottom line is Pounds229,575.00 209.197.157.149 ( talk) 02:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I wonder how much money the movie has made? Samulili ( talk) 09:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I believe that Sir Robin, Black Beast of Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh and Gorge of Eternal Peril should be merged here because none of them appear to meet the WP:FICT guidelines. There is some real world info for Gorge of Eternal Peril, but no references, and even if some are found, that info could easily be merged into a production section here. -- Scorpion 0422 23:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I loved the game 7th level put out back in the day, and if I remember correctly, the tetris clone was called "Drop Dead", not "Bring out your dead", though that is the title of the scene it spoofs. If i also remember correctly, there were seperate executable files on the cd-rom that played the seperate minigames... perhaps I'll try to find that old game...I always found it hilarious when the "not dead" piece would fall & twich around on the way down, trying to mess you up. -- Bubacxo 08:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
The reference to the Seventh Seal would be more complete if it also mentioned the fact that the Original UK Trailer to Holy Grail sends up the beach scene at the beginning of Seventh Seal. In it, Death is seen giving the Antonius Block character a face full of cream pie (or maybe just shaving cream? - whatever). — Preceding unsigned comment added by an IP editor on 13:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
There are various redirects to this page, many of them topics covered in the film. For example, African Swallow redirects here. However, there is no mention at all of African swallows. If someone has time to work on this article, the redirect topics need to be covered within this article, or at least mentioned. Bob the Wikipedian ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Is there any reason to have E. B. White listed in the writing credits in the infobox? Did they actually use his book as the basis for the film? It seems that the source material is well-known enough for them to have written the script without recourse to any specific text. In the absence of a reference which says they used White, it should be removed. --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 03:45, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Uh, wouldn't that have been T. H. White anyway? --- User:66.171.231.226
Got a question. The question is this:
When I first saw Holy Grail it was on home-video VHS. I distinctly remember the opening scene being narrated. The opening scene shows a knight kneeling before King Arthur in front of the cardboard cutout of Camelot. The narration turns out to be a voice-casting call. Several voices are tried, one being a "slow" reader, another being a shouting lunatic who is told to "go away" and walks off mumbling "what's wrong with my voice? There's nothing wrong with my voice, only my mind" until eventually a Japanese voice begins narrating in Japanese (with English sub-titles so we can follow). The voice-director announces that this is very good and tells the Japanese narrator to "carry on". The narrator then begins to talk up the Japanese restaurant over the road from the cinema (which we see film of).
During this whole sequence several pieces of the film are seen, particularly the dancing chorus from "Camelot". Eventually the whole scene comes to an end back with the kneeling knight and Arthur. The cardboard cut-out of Camelot falls over, Arthur looks at it, stabs the kneeling knight to death, sheaths his sword and walks out of frame.
Okay, now for the question: Is any of this real? Or have I completely imagined the whole thing?
The narration begins: "Once in a lifetime comes a motion picture to end all motion pictures..." (well, maybe "end all" is not quite correct). 203.144.65.109 ( talk) 06:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh, gee, I don't know, Jimmy's Boy, maybe as it has been shown not to be a false memory but an actual, as in real, piece of Pythonism and is connected directly to, if not an actual part of, the film, then perhaps it deserves a mention in the article. Possibly... 203.144.65.109 ( talk) 06:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry to say that I've come up empty handed so far in my search for the books I listed before. I'll keep looking, but it looks like the only practical way of getting to the books would be to order them. I'm reluctant to do that without being able to actually see them first. -- Ned Scott 02:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but I haven't worked out how to cite my sources, but I'll look into it soon. For the record, a complete explanation that backs up my edit of the article to reflect the 1983 RCA CED as the first widescreen/extended release rather than it being the Criterion Laserdisc (as was claimed in the article prior to my edit) can be found here: http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/monty-python-grail.html MaxVolume ( talk) 18:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I came to this article to find out how the film fared when it opened, how widespread the release was, and what the general impression was. Was it perceived to have lost money early on? None of these questions are answered... in fact the article is heavily post-2000 centric and focuses on the re-release. - Rolypolyman ( talk) 17:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
There is no need for anything to be split from this article. These are all elements of the film (or the DVD) that do not extend far from it. The plot points belong in the plot section and anything related to the real world should be split between the character section, development section, and some sort of popular culture section. TTN ( talk) 18:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
*Oppose merge
Yngvarr
(t)
(c) 21:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC) struck
Yngvarr
(t)
(c) 16:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
When we have merge discussions, the idea is that people from all over Wikipedia discuss the issue, putting forth pro and con arguments, and consensus is supposed to occur by people reading and responding to others arguments.
So far, this has been pretty lopsided: TTN argued for merging the articles back together. He pointed out that there wasn't a problem with length, and wasn't a problem with the amount of unique material. Both of these are logical arguments in favor of a merge.
CW, Hobit, and Erik the Red all argued from a precedent situation: they quoted a recent AFD, and argued that it set a precedent against the merge. OK, one argument against.
DGG provided kind of a non-sequiter argument against the need for external sources to be focused on a topic. No one had argued that they did, so I'm not sure what he's responding to. That's a wash.
Eusebeus argues that the material for HHG can fit in the parent, and having it be standalone acts as a dross attracter. Call it the attractive nuisance theory of article layout. Reinforcement for the original merge argument, and one new one.
Casliber argues that TTN is wrong, that the parent article sits at the edge of needing a split, and a merge would make it grow too large. This is a new argument against merge.
Tonir uses his personal feelings about the topic. No argument to be found there.
I argue that the standalone articles constitute plot-only articles, violating WP:NOT#PLOT. A new argument for merge.
Protonk argues that the topics aren't sufficiently distinct, which I guess is a variation of the notability argument. I put this in the same class as I did Tonir's : there just isn't enough of a reference to existing policy and consensus for me to treat it as a valid argument.
Ned Scott uses a sources argument, but can't offer a single one, nor even identify the articles for which he believes sources exist. No argument to be found there.
Cimon Avaro uses a summary style argument. One more for the non-merge camp.
Eusebeus proposes a compromise: don't merge everything back into Monty Python and the Holy Grail, but develop a new article by merging these subordinate articles together. Not an argument, per se, but something to discuss.
Jasynnash2 repeats the same fallacy as Tonir: personal feelings about notability as opposed to any argument based in policy and consensus.
Then we have the first problem: the people that don't provide any logic or reasoning at all. RepublicanJacobite agrees with something, but there's no way to tell what. Feddx, Mattderojas, and Yngvarr took Nancy Reagan's advice, and just said "No".
These things don't work. Personal feelings about notability and personal feelings about sources you can't be bothered to look at or for don't hold any weight.
The argument it stands today is:
That's the issue we should be debating. Is that a correct paraphrase? If so, which argument is stronger?
Eusebeus's proposal deserves discussion as well ... if Monty Python and the Holy Grail is too large to accomodate putting all of the subarticles back in, would merging the subarticles together address enough of the merge arguments and enough of the anti-merge arguments to make everyone only mildly unhappy? Kww ( talk) 00:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
So I guess libraries are closed on Sundays... I'll try to swing by tomorrow before work or during my lunch break (a boring hour anyways, and the library is only ten minutes away).
In any case, even the ones I do believe could support independent articles probably should be cleaned up/trimmed/whatever. I generally feel that even notable fictional topics should grow in a way that is healthy, if that makes any sense. So I do understand what you guys are saying when it comes to the articles that are pretty much all re-cap and not much else. I do think that some of them will likely be merged in some form. Some merging might not even have to do with "notability" as much as better organization. My apologies for my initial knee-jerk reaction.
I think we all agree that we don't want what we currently have to continue. These articles are in poor shape. -- Ned Scott 03:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm still hunting for those books. None of the public libraries in the county have any of the ones I listed, so I'm going to try the community college and university next. -- Ned Scott 01:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
In the 'discussion' above it was alleged that reliable sources establishing the notability of any of this material are impossible to find. Linked below, several thousand news articles which easily do just that. Plus links showing thousands of people viewing these articles last month... which, logically, they would not be doing (decades after the fact) if the pages were not notable.
There are also of course the numerous sources actually listed IN some of the articles... particularly Rabbit of Caerbannog and Patsy_(Monty_Python). Then there are books like this encyclopedia, this collection of synopses, and this text on the philosophical concepts in Monty Python's work... all of which cover these topics (as can be seen via Amazon's 'search within this book' feature). -- CBD 12:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I am pretty much convinced that the "Lancelot wedding assault" and "The Bridge" scenes were inspired by similar ones from a 1968 Italian movie, "L'Armata Brancaleone" by Mario Monicelli. The whole idea is also quite similar, for in this movie a poor knight is convinced by some peasants to claim a fief, whose grant documents were stolen (By them) from a noble. They then set in a "quest" to find this fief, suffering all the vicissitudes of medieval life - plague, religious fundamentalism, etc.
I disbelieve this. It's too far before their actin' time, and too close to their time to pass unnoticed...although rippin' is common among communi...eh, comic's, it's no new idea they're comin' up with. Satirization of religion and medieval times may be a usual subject among actors....and the movie would've been lashed if this was discovered. By the way, there's an difference; Here there's not just a poor knight, but a whole troupe of rich knights fighting the french and a bridge of Death. Definately more inspired by the actual tales of the knights of the round table rather than an obscure italian movie. Totally out of question, that's for sure! Stop these vile accusations, now!-- 217.199.54.130 13:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I haven't actually seen the scene in Harvest Moon: Friends of Mineral Town that is supposedly a reference to the Holy Grail, but given the description of it, that Gary cuts his hand and says "it's only a scratch", I would doubt this is actually a reference to the film. If he cuts off his hand, maybe, but unless that happens, I am skeptical. Reveilled 01:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Why is Monty Python, as in the name of the troupe, in italics throughout this article? The name of the film should be in italics, certainly, but not the group. -- Charles 03:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
reference to the movie from the legend of the green dragon on www.comfortabledumb.com server for the game
You grab your axe to attack a tree with all your strength.
As you approach a tree, you are suddenly surrounded!
You fall to the ground paralyzed as a group of towering knights start shouting at you in a menacing tone!
'NI! NI! NI!'
However, you recover soon enough to realize that in actuality, they are more annoying than dangerous.
For some odd reason, you pick up a herring and chop down one of the trees in the forest.
You harness the power of 'NI' to attack other creatures!
You've completed Phase 1 of work in the lumber yard. It only took you one turn.
it also gives you a 30 round buff in which before you attack you say Ni! Ni! Ni!
when it runs out its you now say Ecky, Ecky, Ecky, Ecky, P'tang, Zoo Boing! Goodem-zoo-owli-zhiv
--God þe mid sie, WhiteWolf 19:48, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Does anybody know what order the scenes were filmed? I do know: 1). The scenes weren't shot in chronological order; 2). On the DVD, Gilliam (part of the Gilliam/Jones DVD Commentary) states that the opening scene (the "Coconuts" scene) was shot at the end; and 3). The IMDb says that Chapman was very drunk during the beginning of the shoot, the "Bridge of Death" scene. Thank you. -- 69.253.15.246 21:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Given the fact that the Python troupe are all Oxford and Cambridge educated (outside of Terry Gilliam), one of my old English profs drew a parallel to Edmund Spencer's The Faery Queen, which depicts a character getting his limbs hacked off one by one. Is this worthy of addition in this article? And, further more, are there any other links between this film and classical literature?-- Toquinha 19:34, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
There are very many references to medieval literature. Terry Jones was a medievalist (and still is), and it's often been asserted that the references are largely his. One such reference is the 'built a castle. It sank. Built another one…' which is part of the Merlin cycle. I have added a rider where the film is described as a 'parody', and a linkt to Terry Jones. I'm not sure if it would be right to add references, for example to the Faery Queen and the Merlin parts. On the one hand, we're always being encouraged to reference. On the other hand, there are so many (and many are quite minor), that it would be illustrative rather than truly referential. Also, the article is already in danger of becoming trivia. Any thoughts? Martin Turner 22:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't the plot be above production and re-release? That's the tried and true setup. FruitMart07 23:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm more concerned about the haphazard nature of the plot summary. (Episodic, strung together only by the quest for the grail? Isn't that how most movies work? They're called "scenes".) For such a landmark film in geek history, the recap is all over the place. I'll take a whack at cleaning it up, while I'm at it I'll move it above the other two. Delius1967 04:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Some of the cultural references listed here seem to merely be coincidences, such as the Banjo-Tooie, Dynasty Warriors 4, and Elder Scrolls III: Bloodmoon references. For example, shouting "Run away!" when being attacked is a bit too general to be a reference, as is an elderly man shouting "I'm not dead yet!" when close to death. Ralff 22:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
The articles which appear in the "Characters" and "Miscellaneous" sections of the {{ Monty Python and the Holy Grail}} template seem to be prime candidates for a merge - I propose List of Monty Python and the Holy Grail characters - and that the minor misc. items be merged to this article. In fact, there's no real need for a template for this film at all, since each article on it links to each other through this one. QmunkE 14:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
My GOD! That list is larger than the article. I have moved it over to Talk:Monty_Python_and_the_Holy_Grail/reference_list so users can go in, trim it down and take what is most important. Wikipedia isn't a list of trivia. But it is not paper. So try working out what really needs to belong at the reference list and add them to the article. -- Orbit One Talk| Babel 21:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
On the file sharing networks, a copy of what has to be the Special Edition DVD of the film is circulating. However, it does not, as the wikipedia page state, miss "the "Swedish" subtitle "Mønti Pythøn ik den Hølie Gräilen" in the film's opening title screen", neither does the opening credits of Dentist on the Job appear "before the voice of the projectionist (presumably that of Terry Jones)".
It was copied (not made / re released) 2004.09.15 according to its information, meaning it can't be the "Extraordinary Deluxe" version. It does contain the two audio commentary tracks, the "get on with it"-cut out scene etc, and a separate DVD with all extra stuff (Japaneese dub, LEGO animation, The Quest for the Holy Grail Locations etc). In order words, it seems to me it has to be the Special Edition DVD, but if that is so, then there are either more than one version of the Special Edition DVD, or the wikipedia page is simply incorrect. Someone with a bit more insight could perhaps look at it? :) -- Ojan 23:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
"The title of the film, which would normally come at the start, appears after 25 minutes."
I am removing this, as it is false. The second credit at the very beginning is the title of the film (with its infamous fake subtitle that is allegedly missing from certain editions), and the animated sequence that appears 25 minutes (24 minutes, to be more precise) into the film features a slightly different title: The Quest for the Holy Grail. Funkeboy 23:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
wat happened to my add on at the end of the trivia? about the R2R credits thing? its legit, im one of those weird people who still have a dreamcast, and i just beat the game(not the first time) and there it was. i swear.
The juggreserection 03:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
never mind its there now.
The juggreserection 03:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Saturday Night Live producer Lorne Michaels first met Chevy Chase while they were both waiting in line to see Monty Python and the Holy Grail. That meeting led to Chevy being hired on to SNL, and the start of his carrer. Not sure if this bit of trivia is relevant enought to the subject though, but I thought I'd mention it here in case some more experienced Wiki editor wants to reasearch it and add it to the article.
I think that the plot section needs to be expanded and refined a bit. I know that the movie really has very little actual plot, so that may be a problem, but we have to much information outside of the plot section anyway. Mbatman72 20:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Question on authenticity of the source for these subtitles; compare here and the lines below towards the beginning of the movie (at the first castle):
These two lines, among others (check your DVDs) suggest that Henry IV: Part 2 was adapted into what can basically be called a Shakespeare-esque version of Holy Grail. Anyone? -- M ( speak/ spoken) 21:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't we have a page about the French taunter? He is a pretty popular character, and leads one of the most humorous scenes in the film.
See the Userbox. — JuWiki ( Talk <> Resources) 01:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
"In the SRPG Disgaea 2: Cursed Memories, there is an item called Charred Newt. The description says "It didn't get better.", referring to Sir Lancelot."
This isn't referring to Sir Lancelot, but a villager John Cleese was playing at the time. To reference Shakespeare, "One man in his time can play many parts..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.41.53.33 ( talk) 19:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
//pink floyd-Monty Python\\
Is the pink floyd song chapter 24, any relation to scene 24 in the film? pink floyd gave a lot of funds to the making of holy grail. MrOrange91 12:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
In the DVD commentary track Gilliam says the budget was 230 thousand, so I believe the 150 thousand that's currently in the article is incorrect and will be changing that. Ponijs <fatalis> it also says 230 in this FAQ: http://bau2.uibk.ac.at/sg/python/Sources/monty.python.faq.html
The "Monty Python and the Holy Grail (Book)" 1977 Eyre Meuthen includes a "Cost of Production Statement". The bottom line is Pounds229,575.00 209.197.157.149 ( talk) 02:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I wonder how much money the movie has made? Samulili ( talk) 09:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I believe that Sir Robin, Black Beast of Aaaaarrrrrrggghhh and Gorge of Eternal Peril should be merged here because none of them appear to meet the WP:FICT guidelines. There is some real world info for Gorge of Eternal Peril, but no references, and even if some are found, that info could easily be merged into a production section here. -- Scorpion 0422 23:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I loved the game 7th level put out back in the day, and if I remember correctly, the tetris clone was called "Drop Dead", not "Bring out your dead", though that is the title of the scene it spoofs. If i also remember correctly, there were seperate executable files on the cd-rom that played the seperate minigames... perhaps I'll try to find that old game...I always found it hilarious when the "not dead" piece would fall & twich around on the way down, trying to mess you up. -- Bubacxo 08:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
The reference to the Seventh Seal would be more complete if it also mentioned the fact that the Original UK Trailer to Holy Grail sends up the beach scene at the beginning of Seventh Seal. In it, Death is seen giving the Antonius Block character a face full of cream pie (or maybe just shaving cream? - whatever). — Preceding unsigned comment added by an IP editor on 13:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
There are various redirects to this page, many of them topics covered in the film. For example, African Swallow redirects here. However, there is no mention at all of African swallows. If someone has time to work on this article, the redirect topics need to be covered within this article, or at least mentioned. Bob the Wikipedian ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Is there any reason to have E. B. White listed in the writing credits in the infobox? Did they actually use his book as the basis for the film? It seems that the source material is well-known enough for them to have written the script without recourse to any specific text. In the absence of a reference which says they used White, it should be removed. --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 03:45, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Uh, wouldn't that have been T. H. White anyway? --- User:66.171.231.226
Got a question. The question is this:
When I first saw Holy Grail it was on home-video VHS. I distinctly remember the opening scene being narrated. The opening scene shows a knight kneeling before King Arthur in front of the cardboard cutout of Camelot. The narration turns out to be a voice-casting call. Several voices are tried, one being a "slow" reader, another being a shouting lunatic who is told to "go away" and walks off mumbling "what's wrong with my voice? There's nothing wrong with my voice, only my mind" until eventually a Japanese voice begins narrating in Japanese (with English sub-titles so we can follow). The voice-director announces that this is very good and tells the Japanese narrator to "carry on". The narrator then begins to talk up the Japanese restaurant over the road from the cinema (which we see film of).
During this whole sequence several pieces of the film are seen, particularly the dancing chorus from "Camelot". Eventually the whole scene comes to an end back with the kneeling knight and Arthur. The cardboard cut-out of Camelot falls over, Arthur looks at it, stabs the kneeling knight to death, sheaths his sword and walks out of frame.
Okay, now for the question: Is any of this real? Or have I completely imagined the whole thing?
The narration begins: "Once in a lifetime comes a motion picture to end all motion pictures..." (well, maybe "end all" is not quite correct). 203.144.65.109 ( talk) 06:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh, gee, I don't know, Jimmy's Boy, maybe as it has been shown not to be a false memory but an actual, as in real, piece of Pythonism and is connected directly to, if not an actual part of, the film, then perhaps it deserves a mention in the article. Possibly... 203.144.65.109 ( talk) 06:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry to say that I've come up empty handed so far in my search for the books I listed before. I'll keep looking, but it looks like the only practical way of getting to the books would be to order them. I'm reluctant to do that without being able to actually see them first. -- Ned Scott 02:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but I haven't worked out how to cite my sources, but I'll look into it soon. For the record, a complete explanation that backs up my edit of the article to reflect the 1983 RCA CED as the first widescreen/extended release rather than it being the Criterion Laserdisc (as was claimed in the article prior to my edit) can be found here: http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/monty-python-grail.html MaxVolume ( talk) 18:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I came to this article to find out how the film fared when it opened, how widespread the release was, and what the general impression was. Was it perceived to have lost money early on? None of these questions are answered... in fact the article is heavily post-2000 centric and focuses on the re-release. - Rolypolyman ( talk) 17:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
There is no need for anything to be split from this article. These are all elements of the film (or the DVD) that do not extend far from it. The plot points belong in the plot section and anything related to the real world should be split between the character section, development section, and some sort of popular culture section. TTN ( talk) 18:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
*Oppose merge
Yngvarr
(t)
(c) 21:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC) struck
Yngvarr
(t)
(c) 16:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
When we have merge discussions, the idea is that people from all over Wikipedia discuss the issue, putting forth pro and con arguments, and consensus is supposed to occur by people reading and responding to others arguments.
So far, this has been pretty lopsided: TTN argued for merging the articles back together. He pointed out that there wasn't a problem with length, and wasn't a problem with the amount of unique material. Both of these are logical arguments in favor of a merge.
CW, Hobit, and Erik the Red all argued from a precedent situation: they quoted a recent AFD, and argued that it set a precedent against the merge. OK, one argument against.
DGG provided kind of a non-sequiter argument against the need for external sources to be focused on a topic. No one had argued that they did, so I'm not sure what he's responding to. That's a wash.
Eusebeus argues that the material for HHG can fit in the parent, and having it be standalone acts as a dross attracter. Call it the attractive nuisance theory of article layout. Reinforcement for the original merge argument, and one new one.
Casliber argues that TTN is wrong, that the parent article sits at the edge of needing a split, and a merge would make it grow too large. This is a new argument against merge.
Tonir uses his personal feelings about the topic. No argument to be found there.
I argue that the standalone articles constitute plot-only articles, violating WP:NOT#PLOT. A new argument for merge.
Protonk argues that the topics aren't sufficiently distinct, which I guess is a variation of the notability argument. I put this in the same class as I did Tonir's : there just isn't enough of a reference to existing policy and consensus for me to treat it as a valid argument.
Ned Scott uses a sources argument, but can't offer a single one, nor even identify the articles for which he believes sources exist. No argument to be found there.
Cimon Avaro uses a summary style argument. One more for the non-merge camp.
Eusebeus proposes a compromise: don't merge everything back into Monty Python and the Holy Grail, but develop a new article by merging these subordinate articles together. Not an argument, per se, but something to discuss.
Jasynnash2 repeats the same fallacy as Tonir: personal feelings about notability as opposed to any argument based in policy and consensus.
Then we have the first problem: the people that don't provide any logic or reasoning at all. RepublicanJacobite agrees with something, but there's no way to tell what. Feddx, Mattderojas, and Yngvarr took Nancy Reagan's advice, and just said "No".
These things don't work. Personal feelings about notability and personal feelings about sources you can't be bothered to look at or for don't hold any weight.
The argument it stands today is:
That's the issue we should be debating. Is that a correct paraphrase? If so, which argument is stronger?
Eusebeus's proposal deserves discussion as well ... if Monty Python and the Holy Grail is too large to accomodate putting all of the subarticles back in, would merging the subarticles together address enough of the merge arguments and enough of the anti-merge arguments to make everyone only mildly unhappy? Kww ( talk) 00:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
So I guess libraries are closed on Sundays... I'll try to swing by tomorrow before work or during my lunch break (a boring hour anyways, and the library is only ten minutes away).
In any case, even the ones I do believe could support independent articles probably should be cleaned up/trimmed/whatever. I generally feel that even notable fictional topics should grow in a way that is healthy, if that makes any sense. So I do understand what you guys are saying when it comes to the articles that are pretty much all re-cap and not much else. I do think that some of them will likely be merged in some form. Some merging might not even have to do with "notability" as much as better organization. My apologies for my initial knee-jerk reaction.
I think we all agree that we don't want what we currently have to continue. These articles are in poor shape. -- Ned Scott 03:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm still hunting for those books. None of the public libraries in the county have any of the ones I listed, so I'm going to try the community college and university next. -- Ned Scott 01:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
In the 'discussion' above it was alleged that reliable sources establishing the notability of any of this material are impossible to find. Linked below, several thousand news articles which easily do just that. Plus links showing thousands of people viewing these articles last month... which, logically, they would not be doing (decades after the fact) if the pages were not notable.
There are also of course the numerous sources actually listed IN some of the articles... particularly Rabbit of Caerbannog and Patsy_(Monty_Python). Then there are books like this encyclopedia, this collection of synopses, and this text on the philosophical concepts in Monty Python's work... all of which cover these topics (as can be seen via Amazon's 'search within this book' feature). -- CBD 12:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)